The Use of Reason is a blog that takes a common sense view of society and its problems. I try to look at things not from the standpoint of whether the issue has an R or a D next to it, but instead from the perspective of a rational human being trying to solve problems. Oddly enough, the common sense, practical perspective usually ends up being the conservative one. If you'd like a sane, average-Joe's point of view, check out the blog.

Follow by Email

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Yes, I realize there is a rock band by that name, but social distortion is also a very real and problematic phenomenon in our society. Distortion means to alter something so as to make it into something different. That is exactly what is happening to American culture, indeed all of Western culture, today.

My wife was rather nonchalant about gay marriage and the whole debate up until recently. Her point of view was that yes, it is wrong and unnatural, but it's going to happen and really doesn't affect us much. While I could see her argument, I also realized that gay marriage would not be the last gasp of incrementalism. Movements rarely disband when they have met their objective. Too many people depend upon them for their influence and livelihood. Feminism surpassed the goal of political equality and has now embraced the female equivalent of the chauvinism it once decried. The civil rights community achieved political equality in the 1960's and has now graduated to demands for special treatment and reparations for harm inflicted upon distant ancestors.

I realized that the homosexual agenda would not be content with gay marriage. The movement would not suddenly accept that it had political equality (whether or not such was merited) and go happily on its way. New demands would be made, more political and media pressure would be exerted, and the movement would descend into the same depths of ridiculousness as the other movements described earlier. While many of us predicted that plural marriage would be the next step, we failed to realize that such marriages had nothing to do with the agenda of the homosexual lobby.

The next step is, if you haven't already realized it, the forced accommodation of public and private facilities to trans-gendered individuals. The term trans-gendered itself is loaded; its use implies the reality that people who have the biology of one gender are in fact capable of being another. This is not factual. Social scientists have pushed the theory that gender is a socially-constructed idea, but physical scientists find such a notion silly at best. Biologists have demonstrated time after time that there are significant differences between the genders based upon anatomy and biochemistry. Male and female brains function differently.

Yet we are being forced at the point of law to allow men into women's restrooms and women into men's restrooms (come to think of it, I haven't read of any woman asking for that privilege) on the grounds that because they feel they are the opposite gender they must be treated that way. There is no scientific reason for this conclusion. Logic has no place in this argument. If logic were the deciding factor, the debate would be over and men's and women's restroom exclusivity would continue as it has always been. (For a scientific refutation of the transsexual phenomenon, read this link.)

My wife and daughters now have to worry about random boys and men invading their private space and watching them do their business. They have to worry about males infiltrating their locker rooms and leering at them as they dress. There is no longer a social stigma associated with anything vaguely Gay-BLT (my name for LGBT), so there is nothing stopping a curious young man from claiming to be trans-gendered just so he can get a cheap thrill. He can always go back once he has bragged to his friends about the experience--who can refute him?

That which was once considered ridiculous is now commonplace and even required. Those who refuse to play along are attacked as primitives, repugnant carryovers from a bygone era. This perspective reveals the über-liberal animus toward rationality when it comes to human behavior.

Elimination of the concept of a bi-gendered humanity is the next step in homosexual incrementalism. When that is achieved, what will be next? I think the answer will shock those of us who still dare to think logically about the matter.

For those who would throw hermaphrodites into the mix (an extremely rare condition that really has nothing to do with the individuals asking for privileges), there has been no documented case of a hermaphrodite with fertile testis and ovaries simultaneously. The condition is generally an over-developed clitoris or underdeveloped male genitalia. Considering the placement of the genitalia, functional testicles and a functional vagina are not going to exist on a human body--there simply isn't room for both. In this case, the exception only further validates the rule. (For verification of this, go to this link.)

Monday, March 28, 2016

I happened upon a report today on a great and interesting website I will link to below. The article deals with the causes of homosexuality and the virtual nonexistence of such behavior in hunter-gatherer societies, to the point that tribes may not even have words to describe what it is. The author points out that diet and stress levels in the mother (which affect her hormonal production and therefore the fetus) are vastly different in hunter-gatherer societies and modern agricultural societies. He also responds to the genetic argument quite well, stating that the same markers which some associate with homosexuality exist in hunter-gatherer societies but do not result in homosexual behavior.

I was just blown away by the fact that any research existed refuting the normalcy of homosexual behavior and its universality among humans. Read the article yourself and tell me what you think in the comments section.